cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Will Stevens <wstev...@cloudops.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Split Marvin to its own repository
Date Tue, 19 Jul 2016 17:22:35 GMT
I think your alternatives makes sense.

Since we are always merging into and testing 3 different branches (4.7,
4.8, and master in the case of the 4.9 release), we are opening ourselves
to headaches IMHO.  I don't think we can expect that the same Marvin
install will ALWAYS work on all three branches being tested...

We may be able to solve for that, but I do think it is important to
highlight this so we know how we will mitigate the risk if we do go this
route.

*Will STEVENS*
Lead Developer

*CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts
420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6
w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_

On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 1:18 PM, Rohit Yadav <rohit.yadav@shapeblue.com>
wrote:

> Hi Will,
>
>
> I understand your concerns, the goal with this initiative is to make sure
> that Marvin would remain forward compatible with future versions. As for
> the past releases/versions, we cannot guarantee backward compatibility.
>
>
> My main goal was to solve and make it easier for CI systems to configure,
> install Marvin and run integration tests. Please see my previous reply
> where I present an alternative.
>
>
> Regards.
>
> ________________________________
> From: williamstevens@gmail.com <williamstevens@gmail.com> on behalf of
> Will Stevens <wstevens@cloudops.com>
> Sent: 19 July 2016 22:32:26
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Split Marvin to its own repository
>
> So how would the different versions of Marvin be tracked and how would the
> versions be associated with the supported ACS versions?
>
> Because the ACS API changes, a Marvin version will only support a specific
> set of ACS versions.  We need to understand how that will work because this
> is bound to cause some headaches.
>
> For example, assuming the API changes substantially between 4.8, 4.9 and
> 4.10 (new master).  Changes can still be merged into 4.8, 4.9 or 4.10 (new
> master), so the CI environments have to be aware of which version of ACS is
> being run and then install the correct version of Marvin.  IMO this is
> going to make the setting up and running of CI on multiple versions of ACS
> harder.
>
> Is this the same type of problem others are concerned about?  Right now
> since it is packaged with ACS, you can always know that the Marvin with the
> current code is valid for that code.  If we break it out, how do we handle
> that?
>
> *Will STEVENS*
> Lead Developer
>
> *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts
> 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6
> w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_
>
>
> rohit.yadav@shapeblue.com
> www.shapeblue.com
> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London  WC2N 4HSUK
> @shapeblue
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 12:11 PM, Syed Ahmed <sahmed@cloudops.com> wrote:
>
> > I believe it will make CI much smoother. Right now marvin is tied to the
> > Cloudstack repo which was fine if all the integration tests were running
> > from Cloudstack build but we are now seeing much better CI approaches
> with
> > bubble and Trillian and having marvin in its own repo will facilitate
> that
> > even further. I think Rohit can answer this better but this is what I got
> > as a gist of the motive.
> >
> > Does that answer your question Bharat?
> >
> > -Syed
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 9:14 AM, Bharat Kumar <
> bharat.kumar@accelerite.com
> > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Rohit,
> > >
> > >
> > > what are we trying to achieve by moving marvin into a separate repo.?
> > >
> > >
> > > --Bharat.
> > >
> > > ________________________________
> > > From: Raja Pullela <raja.pullela@accelerite.com>
> > > Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2016 5:30:20 PM
> > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Split Marvin to its own repository
> > >
> > > Hi Rohit,
> > >
> > > same question as Rene has posted, impact on older releases – will have
> > > issues on older releases.  I know that the older releases have marvin
> > code
> > > which can be used.  Also, this will require changes on the CI side to
> > pull
> > > the correct repo for Marvin.
> > >
> > > +1, if Bharat can modify CI implementation to take care of this?
> > >
> > > best,
> > > Raja
> > > Senior Manager, Product Development
> > > Accelerate, www.accelerite.com,@accelerite<http://www.accelerite.com<
> http://www.accelerite.com,@accelerite<http://www.accelerite.com>
> > > ,@accelerite>
> > > 2055, Laurelwood Road,  Santa Clara, CA 95054, USA
> > > Phone: 1-408-216-7010
> > >
> > > On 7/18/16, 3:14 PM, "Rohit Yadav" <bhaisaab@apache.org> wrote:
> > > All,
> > >
> > > Based on a recent discussion thread [1], I want to start a voting
> thread
> > to
> > > gather consensus around splitting Marvin from the CloudStack
> repository.
> > >
> > > On successful voting, we would extract and maintain Marvin as a
> separate
> > > library in a separate repository (example repository [2]) and various
> > > build/test systems such as Travis [3] can install it directly for usage
> > > with pip+git etc.
> > >
> > > Background: During the build process, a commands.xml generated to build
> > > apidocs is also used to generate CloudStack Cmd and Request classes are
> > > auto-generated, which is the only dependency why we needed Marvin and
> > > CloudStack together. The auto-generated cloudstackAPI module can be
> also
> > > generated against a live running CloudStack mgmt server which has api
> > > discovery (listApis) enabled. The integration tests will still be tied
> > to a
> > > branch and will remain withing the repository. A PR [3] was sent to
> show
> > > that we can still execute tests using this approach, and this would
> > finally
> > > allow us to build, release and use Marvin as an independent library.
> > >
> > > Vote will be open for 72 hours.
> > >
> > > For sanity in tallying the vote, can PMC members please be sure to
> > indicate
> > > "(binding)" with their vote?
> > >
> > > [ ] +1  approve
> > > [ ] +0  no opinion
> > > [ ] -1  disapprove (and reason why)
> > >
> > > [1] http://markmail.org/thread/kiezqhjpz44hvrau
> > > [2] https://github.com/rhtyd/marvin
> > > [3] https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1599
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Rohit Yadav
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > DISCLAIMER
> > > ==========
> > > This e-mail may contain privileged and confidential information which
> is
> > > the property of Accelerite, a Persistent Systems business. It is
> intended
> > > only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed.
> If
> > > you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read,
> > retain,
> > > copy, print, distribute or use this message. If you have received this
> > > communication in error, please notify the sender and delete all copies
> of
> > > this message. Accelerite, a Persistent Systems business does not accept
> > any
> > > liability for virus infected mails.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > DISCLAIMER
> > > ==========
> > > This e-mail may contain privileged and confidential information which
> is
> > > the property of Accelerite, a Persistent Systems business. It is
> intended
> > > only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed.
> If
> > > you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read,
> > retain,
> > > copy, print, distribute or use this message. If you have received this
> > > communication in error, please notify the sender and delete all copies
> of
> > > this message. Accelerite, a Persistent Systems business does not accept
> > any
> > > liability for virus infected mails.
> > >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message